[Pkg-utopia-maintainers] Request for review: pipewire-module-xrdp

[Dylan Aïssi]

Hi Arnaud,

Le mar. 12 mars 2024 à 11:33, Arnaud Rebillout <arnaudr at debian.org> a écrit :
>
> Hi Dylan,
>
> On 12/03/2024 4:16 am, Dylan Aïssi wrote:
>
> I don't know if it's false positive or not (I'm really not familiar with dynamic linking).
>
> When I look at the x11 module:
>
> $ apt show libpipewire-0.3-modules-x11 | grep ^Depends:
> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.4), libcanberra0t64 (>= 0.2), libpipewire-0.3-0 (= 1.0.3-1.1), libx11-6 (>= 2:1.7.0), libxfixes3 (>= 1:6.0.0), libcanberra-pulse
>
> When I look at the xrdp module:
>
> $ dpkg-deb --info libpipewire-0.3-module-xrdp_0.1-2_amd64.deb | grep Depends:
> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.17), pipewire-bin
>
> I wonder why there's no dependency on libpipewire-0.3.0, and if it's something that needs to be fixed or not. I also guess that if there was such a dependency, there would be no dpkg-shlibdeps warning?
>

I checked all other modules with "ldd -r" they are all linked to
libpipewire-0.3.so.0,
libpipewire-0.3-module-xrdp is the only one not linked and complaining about
undefined symbols. Adding "-lpipewire-0.3" to LDFLAGS in src/Makefile.am
is enough to fix that, but not sure if it 's correct, maybe something
to check with
upstream?

> I would add a dependency on "pipewire" to be sure its services
> are installed. I don't know if this module is useful without a session
> manager otherwise you would also need to add wireplumber as
> dependency.
>
> I spend some time thinking about this. I think that I should actually split in two binary packages:
>
> - libpipewire-0.3-module-xrdp would _only_ install the .so. That's in line with libpipewire-0.3-modules and libpipewire-0.3-modules-x11, and it's probably simple to come up with the right dependencies.
> - pipewire-xrdp (name taken after the name of the xdg/autostart script) would install the integration bits, ie. /etc/xdg/autostart/pipewire-xrdp.desktop and /usr/libexec/pipewire-module-xrdp/load_pw_modules.sh.
>
> With this split, it gives some rope for users. If needed they can install the module only, and then come up with another integration (maybe they don't want to use a xdg/autostart script for example).
>
> I also think that, for the principle of least surprise, going forward it's nice if users know that packages named libpipewire-*-modules-* only install modules, as the name suggest, and don't install anything else.
>
> But maybe I'm over thinking... What do you think?

I really like this suggestion, it makes perfect sense! And it aligns with
recent discussion I have seen about Debian library packaging and
dependencies :-)

Best regards,
Dylan